Summary

The focus of this research and evaluation endeavor was on
direct service programs in Ohio, particularly advocacy services for
female victims of violence, receiving funding through the Services,
Training, Officers, Prosecutors (STOP) formula grants under the
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994. The objectives of this
project were (1) to describe and compare existing advocacy services in
Ohio, (2) to compare victim advocacy typologies and identify key
variables in the delivery of services, (3) to develop a better
understanding of how victim advocacy services are defined and
delivered, and (4) to assess the effectiveness of those services. For
Part 1, Service Agencies Data, comprehensive information about 13
VAWA-funded programs providing direct services in urban Ohio was
gathered through a mailback questionnaire and phone interviews.
Detailed information was collected on organizational structure,
clients served, and agency services. Focus groups were also used to
collect data from clients (Parts 3-11) and staff (Parts 12-23) about
their definitions of advocacy, types of services needed by victims,
services provided to victims, and important outcomes for service
providers. Part 2, Police Officer Data, focused on police officers'
attitudes toward domestic violence and on evaluating service outcomes
in one particular agency. The agency selected was a prosecutor's
office that planned to improve services to victims by changing how the
police and prosecutors responded to domestic violence cases. The
prosecutor's office selected one police district as the site for
implementing the new program, which included training police officers
and placing a prosecutor in the district office to work directly with
the police on domestic violence cases. The evaluation of this program
was designed to assess the effectiveness of the police officers'
training and officers' increased access to information from the
prosecutor on the outcome of the case. Police officers from the
selected district were administered surveys. Also surveyed were
officers from another district that handled a similar number of
domestic violence cases and had a comparable number of officers
employed in the district. Variables in Part 1 include number of staff,
budget, funding sources, number and type of victims served, target
population, number of victims served speaking languages other than
English, number of juveniles and adults served, number of victims with
special needs served, collaboration with other organizations, benefits
of VAWA funding, and direct and referral services provided by the
agency. Variables in Part 2 cover police officers' views on whether it
was a waste of time to prosecute domestic violence cases, if these
cases were likely to result in a conviction, whether they felt
sympathetic toward the victim or blamed the victim, how the
prosecution should proceed with domestic violence cases, how the
prosecution and police worked together on such cases, whether domestic
violence was a private matter, and how they felt about the new program
implemented under VAWA.

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

none

Restrictions

A downloadable version of data for this study is available however, certain identifying information in the downloadable version may have been masked or edited to protect respondent privacy. Additional data not included in the downloadable version are available in a restricted version of this data collection. For more information about the differences between the downloadable data and the restricted data for this study, please refer to the codebook notes section of the PDF codebook. Users interested in obtaining restricted data must complete and sign a Restricted Data Use Agreement, describe the research project and data protection plan, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.

Time Period(s)

1999

Data Collection Notes

(1) Data collected from focus group sessions with
clients (Parts 3-11) and staff (Parts 12-23) of victim advocacy
service providers are available through the Restricted Access Data
Archive. (2) The user guide, codebook, and data collection instruments
are provided as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file. The PDF file
format was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed
using PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader.
Information on how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is provided
on the ICPSR Web site.

Study Purpose

The focus of this research and evaluation
endeavor was on direct service programs in Ohio, particularly advocacy
services for female victims of violence, receiving funding through the
STOP (Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) formula grants under
the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994. It was undertaken as a
collaborative partnership between the Ohio Office of Criminal Justice
Services (OCJS) and the Ohio State University (OSU). The objectives of
this project were (1) to describe and compare existing advocacy
services in Ohio, (2) to compare victim advocacy typologies and
identify key variables in the delivery of services, (3) to develop a
better understanding of how victim advocacy services are defined and
delivered, and (4) to assess the effectiveness of those services.
There were two components to this evaluation: a study of victim
service agencies (Parts 1 and 3-23) and a survey of police officers
(Part 2), some of whom participated in a new victim services program
and others who did not. The descriptions of victim advocacy services
focused on (a) the types of agencies providing services, (b) how those
programs defined advocacy, (c) how those definitions were reflected in
the services being delivered, and (d) what outcomes the funded
agencies hoped to achieve. The program evaluation sought to determine
the effectiveness of the police officers' training and the effects of
their improved access to information on the outcome of domestic
violence cases in which they were involved.

Study Design

In fiscal year 1996, 55 programs in Ohio were
competitively selected through a grants process to receive VAWA
funding. For this study, VAWA programs in urban centers were selected,
since they offered the largest number of clients and the richest
diversity of services. The number of agencies participating in the
evaluation was further restricted to agencies identified as providing
direct services to victims. When these two criteria were applied, 13
victim advocacy programs were identified to participate in the
evaluation. For Part 1, Service Agencies Data, a survey was mailed to
each of the 13 agencies to collect comprehensive information about
services provided for victims. Respondents could either mail or fax
their completed surveys to the investigators. Additionally, a few
telephone interviews were conducted due to time constraints. The
survey was designed to collect detailed information from each of the
projects based on OCJS and VAWA quarterly performance reports, and to
solicit more detailed information on organizational structure, clients
served, and agency services. Focus groups were also used to collect
data from clients (Parts 3-11) and staff (Parts 12-23) about
definitions of advocacy, type of services needed by victims, services
that are provided, and the outcomes that are important to service
providers. This qualitative approach allowed the researchers to
describe services from the perspectives of the recipients and the
providers and to compare their views on critical questions while still
being sensitive to the needs of the women who participated. Each of
the focus groups lasted one to one and a half hours and the
discussions were audio-taped for later transcription and analysis.
The number of participants in each group ranged from two to sixteen.
No demographic data were collected on the participants in an effort to
protect respondent confidentiality of the clients and staff. Site
codes were also omitted for the same reason. Part 2, Police Officer
Data, focused on police officers' attitudes toward domestic violence
and on evaluating service outcomes in one particular agency. The
agency selected was a prosecutor's office that aimed to improve
services to victims by changing how the police and prosecutors
responded to domestic violence cases. The prosecutor's office chose
one police district as the site for implementing the new program,
which included training police officers and placing a prosecutor in
the district office to work directly with the police on domestic
violence cases. A questionnaire was developed to evaluate the police
training program, and police officers from the selected district were
administered the surveys. Also surveyed were officers from another
district who handled a similar number of domestic violence cases and
employed a comparable number of officers. The first 20 questions of
the survey were completed by all respondents in both districts and
addressed attitudes toward domestic violence cases. Five additional
questions were included on the version distributed to the selected
district to assess the officers' reactions to the procedural changes
that were implemented as part of the new approach to dealing with
domestic violence.

Universe

Part 1: All victim advocacy service agencies that provided
direct services and were located in Ohio urban centers. Part 2: All
police officers in an urban Ohio district where the prosecutor's
office implemented a new training program, and all officers from a
comparison district. Parts 3-11: Clients of victim advocacy service
agencies in Ohio urban centers. Parts 12-23: Staff of victim advocacy
service agencies in Ohio urban centers.

Unit(s) of Observation

Part 1: Programs, Parts 2-23: Individuals.

Data Source

Most of the data from Part 1 were collected with
mailback questionnaires. Some telephone interviews were conducted for
Part 1 due to time constraints. Part 2 data were collected through
self-enumerated questionnaires. Data for Parts 3 to 23 were gathered
through focus groups.

Data Type(s)

survey data, and focus group data

Description of Variables

Variables in Part 1 include number of staff,
budget, funding sources, number and types of victims served, target
population, number of victims served speaking languages other than
English, number of juveniles and adults served, number of victims with
special needs served, collaboration with other organizations, benefits
of VAWA funding, and direct and referral services provided by the
agency. Variables in Part 2 cover police officers' views on whether it
was a waste of time to prosecute domestic violence cases, if these
cases were likely to result in a conviction, whether they felt
sympathetic toward the victims or blamed the victims, how the
prosecution should proceed with domestic violence cases, how the
prosecution and police worked together on such cases, whether domestic
violence was a private matter, and, for officers participating in the
new program implemented under VAWA, how they felt about the
program. In Parts 3-11 clients were asked about what brought them to
the service agency, why they chose that particular agency, what it was
like at the agency, if they felt safe, whether the staff were
supportive, what types of services they received and whether the
services met their needs, and their biggest success in coming to the
agency. In Parts 12-23 staff were asked what brought women to their
agency, how they described their target population, why women chose
their agency, what women needed from their agency, whether the women
felt safe at their agency, whether staff were supportive of clients,
what services women received, whether these services met the needs of
women, and what were the biggest successes of their clients.

Response Rates

The response rate for Part 1 was 85 percent. The
response rate for Part 2 is unknown.

Presence of Common Scales

Original Release Date

2000-09-18

Version Date

2006-03-30

Version History

2005-11-04 On 2005-03-14 new files were added to one
or more datasets. These files included additional setup files as well
as one or more of the following: SAS program, SAS transport, SPSS portable,
and Stata system files. The metadata record was revised 2005-11-04 to
reflect these additions.

2004-06-10 Focus group data were added to the collection as
Parts 3-23. These data parts are only available through the Restricted
Access Data Archive.

2000-09-18 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

Created online analysis version with question text.

Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.

2006-03-30 File CQ2992.ALL.PDF was removed from any previous datasets and flagged as a study-level file, so that it will accompany all downloads.

Notes

The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.

One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.

This website is funded through Inter-agency agreements through the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention of
the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its
components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this website (including, without limitation,
its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided).